Obama leads Hillary in the buying off of superdelegates by giving them money

[Herman Munster]

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/02/superdelegates.html

Many of the superdelegates who could well decide the Democratic presidential nominee have already been plied with campaign contributions by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, a new study shows.

"While it would be unseemly for the candidates to hand out thousands of dollars to primary voters, or to the delegates pledged to represent the will of those voters, elected officials serving as superdelegates have received about $890,000 from Obama and Clinton in the form of campaign contributions over the last three years," the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics reported today.

About half the 800 superdelegates -- elected officials, party leaders, and others -- have committed to either Clinton or Obama, though they can change their minds until the convention.

Obama's political action committee has doled out more than $694,000 to superdelegates since 2005, the study found, and of the 81 who had announced their support for Obama, 34 had received donations totaling $228,000.

Clinton's political action committee has distributed about $195,000 to superdelegates, and only 13 of the 109 who had announced for her have received money, totaling about $95,000.

[Diane R]

1. This is a misleading title, and I find it very dishonest. Stop already.

[Herman Munster]

2. whaaaaaaaa whaaaaaaaaa

[Danger Mouse]

10. desparation, ah...so funny.

:rofl:

[polpilot]

42. Obama adds another win!!!

[RiverStone]

69. All your opposition research Herman....

And how many minds have been changed here?

Negative advertising does not work on DU, in fact - it creates an opposite reaction.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

72. "Negative advertising does not work on DU..."

"...in fact - it creates an opposite reaction."


Deserving of a thread thumbtacked to the top of the forum.


:applause:

[anamandujano]

74. That might stop the Obama regulars from starting all their negative threads.

Oops!

[jackson_dem]

6. It is accurate

[Tellurian]

43. Yes, the Title is accurate... and to the point. What is interesting "IS" this:

"Obama's political action committee has doled out more than $694,000 to superdelegates since 2005, the study found, and of the 81 who had announced their support for Obama, 34 had received donations totaling $228,000."

So, another Obama LIE is revealed. Obama said unequivocally, he would finish out his first term in the Senate with no intentions of contemplating a run for the presidency. When all along, he was plotting and planning behind the scenes with Kerry and Kennedy...long before he announced his intentions publicly to run for the presidency.

So much for the "new" Obama policies of transparency and "clean" government.

Obama: "The Establishment" candidate. Taking direction from the "old" establishment icons, Kerry and Kennedy!

[K Gardner]

50. Yes, we've all seen the TPM for the day from HIS44.

[karynnj]

53. So, he was plotting with Kerry before Kerry opted not to run?

Not to mention, Kennedy was unambiguously supporting Kerry - and waited nearly a year after Kerry didn't jump in to endorse Obama.

Obama wasn't giving them money as superdelegates - he was giving them money as people up for election in 2006 - and this shows he was more generous that HRC who was attempting in 2006 to get a huge warchest for 2008. She had a very weak challenger and she rasised a huge amount money. Some of that money was used to set up the structures needed for fundraising in 2008 - including a data base that rivaled the one the DNC had and a large part was transfered to the 2008 account. None of this was quetionable or illegal.

[rodeodance]

38. OP should have included 4:1 ratio. to be more honest.

[emilyg]

3. Interesting. Read it earlier.

[CalGator]

4. that's a bit disingenuous, don't you think?

HRC and BHO have been giving money to candidates from their PACs since before they were candidates. They are helping these candidates get elected, and apparently Obama is doing a good job at it. But there is no quid pro quo here. Obviously he isn't buying any superdelegates since he has been lagging behind her since day 1 of the campaign despite "buying off" by your words.

[catagory5]

5. It is dishonest...

Only because it shows obama doing it more often huh?

[CalGator]

12. where did I say the article was dishonest? nt

[jackson_dem]

7. What percentage of Obama's lobbiyst funded PAC money went to candidates in the early states?

It is obvious what is going...

[CalGator]

13. uh, no

It's not obvious. Obama did not give money to delegates to get their votes. He raised more money and gave it to more candidates (not super delegates per se) so they could get re-elected than Clinton did. Per super delegate they received, the amount given and super delegates votes received is about equal. There are a few other responses that thoroughly debunk this theory of yours already, so I won't waste more time.

[jackson_dem]

19. In which states?

How much of the money did Obama give to candidates in Colorado, Vermont, and Tennessee versus what he sent to Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina? ;)

[CalGator]

21. you tell me

you're the one implying he tried offering it to the early primary states. the article doesn't say it. provide proof or STFU

[jackson_dem]

23. You should know what your candidate does...

According to the Obama campaign itself 43% of the dough went to four small states while 57% went to the other forty six states. What made Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada so special?

-snip-

According to a Hopefund finance report filed with the Federal Election Commission two weeks ago, the committee gave nearly $160,000 between July 1 and Nov. 5 to local and congressional officials in states that are holding presidential contests next month. During that period, Hopefund gave about $210,000 to federal candidates in other states across the country.

"There's a lot that voters don't know about Barack Obama," Wolfson said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "And one thing they don't know, we found out this week, which is that he has been using and operating a so-called leadership PAC, an apparent contravention of campaign finance laws, taking in money from lobbyists despite the fact that he said he doesn't take money from lobbyists."

Obama officials have said Hopefund was merely trying to assist Democratic candidates and pointed out that of the $476,000 that Hopefund contributed in 2007, about 57 percent went to states other than Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina.

But officials acknowledged to The Washington Post last week that campaign officials were consulted to determine who some of the recipients should be. They said the contributions did not violate FEC regulations.

http://nc.startribune.com/587/story/1586786.html

[CalGator]

27. I don't go looking into every nook and cranny

It is interesting that Obama gave a disproprtionate amount to the early states, but it still does not mean he bought anything. Most super delegates still went for Hillary, who squandered most of the $36m of her campaign's funds trying to win by a large margin in '06 to boost her electoral legitimacy than to help the party take control of the House and Senate like Obama did.

[jackson_dem]

29. Results don't matter. Intent does

If I try to rob a bank and fail does that absolve me of any criminal liability? It is obvious what Mr. Ethics, Mr. Clean Government was doing...

He broke the law. Why would he do that unless there was a payoff for him?

[CalGator]

31. broke the law?!

This is why you Hillbots are not winning any battles on DU. You try to spin the smallest thing into a crime that doesn't exist.

[jackson_dem]

32. It broke FEC regulations

It is illegal to use a pac like his for a presidential campaign. The reason he hasn't been called on it is no one can definitely prove it but the circumstantial evidence is clear and convincing...

[CalGator]

33. well duh

there was no quid pro quo. I have said this earlier. And had there been, it obviously didn't work since CLINTON LEADS THE SUPER DELEGATE (i.e. unelected) COUNT.... for now.

[jackson_dem]

34. That has no bearing on the legality of what he did

Maybe he would lead the superdelegate count if he spread the money proportionately around the 50 states instead of having a 4 state strategy to set himself up for his presidential run?

[CalGator]

35. legality?

There was nothing illegal in what he did. Nothing immoral. Nothing against campaign rules. This is a total non-issue.

[jackson_dem]

36. It's against FEC rules

[karynnj]

56. Was the support Edwards gave Iowa Democrats and others illegal?

There was NOTHING wrong here.

[karynnj]

55. He didn't use it for his Presidential campaign

he used it to help them in 2006. He was also not the only one to have done it. Many of these superdelegates likely got money or assistance from OBama, Clark, Kerry, Clinton and Edwards. They couldn't vote for all of them.

Obama's fund raising, campaigning, and endorsement value did buy long term good will - but that is not secret, illegal or dishonest.

[karynnj]

54. He did not break any law

What he did helped us in 2006. Everyone intending to run and many with no intentions of running worked as hard as they could in 2004. You were an Edwards person - was it wrong for Edwards to do fund raisers for several people in Iowa and elsewhere? Was it wrong that Kerry raised $14 million for them? What about Clark? These were the people we were PRAISING in 2006.

Was there a self interest? I think so - but it was also an important thing to do and a benefit to the Democratic party.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

16. I think you are arguing that Hillary didn't support other lawmakers' run for office

but that Barack Obama did.

Its called the 50 state strategy.

Hillary did amass a gigantic war chest for her US Senate run, money that she didn't really
need, and did very little to help other candidates who were running.

[jackson_dem]

22. More like the 4 state strategy

According to the Obama campaign itself 43% of the dough went to four small states while 57% went to the other forty six states. What made Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada so special?

-snip-

According to a Hopefund finance report filed with the Federal Election Commission two weeks ago, the committee gave nearly $160,000 between July 1 and Nov. 5 to local and congressional officials in states that are holding presidential contests next month. During that period, Hopefund gave about $210,000 to federal candidates in other states across the country.

"There's a lot that voters don't know about Barack Obama," Wolfson said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "And one thing they don't know, we found out this week, which is that he has been using and operating a so-called leadership PAC, an apparent contravention of campaign finance laws, taking in money from lobbyists despite the fact that he said he doesn't take money from lobbyists."

Obama officials have said Hopefund was merely trying to assist Democratic candidates and pointed out that of the $476,000 that Hopefund contributed in 2007, about 57 percent went to states other than Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina.

But officials acknowledged to The Washington Post last week that campaign officials were consulted to determine who some of the recipients should be. They said the contributions did not violate FEC regulations.

http://nc.startribune.com/587/story/1586786.html

[CalGator]

30. 4 state strategy?

That sounds likes Hillary's campaign strategy.

Dean and Obama try to win 50 states. Hillary tries to win 4 (NY CA TX OH).


And before you go Bush debate on me and say "You forgot Pennsylvania", it's a joke.

[rodeodance]

40. Curious --the 4 where half the $$ went --another DU pointed this out--

[FrenchieCat]

8. You are so silly! Every member of congress is a superdelegate....and so

That only shows that Obama knows how to raise money, and gave since 2005 to their election campaigns....

That's probably why we were able to retake congress in 2006, cause Democrats were raising the money to get it done.

Who would want to support someone who can't raise funds until we get money out of our elections? Bwahahahawaaaaa!

[jackson_dem]

24. Why did he send 43% of the money to Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada?

According to the Obama campaign itself 43% of the dough went to four small states while 57% went to the other forty six states. What made Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada so special?

[Tatiana]

9. Debunked here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4594300&mesg_id=4594588

[Divernan]

25. Good link. Here's what it says:

"Further down in the article, it's noted that other primary contenders, Gov. Richardson as one, were recipients and, as a side note, the two front runners have donated to each others campaigns at times.

Please note, folks, this is a tracking from 2005 up to now. And, we had a major Congressional election in 2006.

The implication of a quid pro quo is over the top, on this one.

Oh, and for perspective - $694,000 over three years averages out to $330,000/year spread out over a number of campaigns. And $195,000 over three years averages out to $65,000/year spread out over a number of campaigns.

Some of all that may have gone to 2006 races, dontcha think?"

It's SOP for legislators with safe races to donate some of their campaign funds to fellow legislators who are in need of help to hang onto their seats. There are rules/paramaters as to how campaign funds may be spent, and one of the provisions is to donate it to others' campaigns.
As others have mentioned, Senator Clinton was an exception to this practise to the extent that she had raised much more than she needed for her campaign but was notably tightfisted when it came to helping her Dem colleagues. I think it was because she was saving for her presidential race - which was her right, of course. But there's nothing wrong with Obama helping out other Dems to get elected, either.

[anamandujano]

39. Question--Obama knew he was going to run. Why didn't he save?

Possibly, he knew it was a good investment and knew there were millions more waiting in the wings from Exelon and the like.

[Tatiana]

51. Did you not read the post above? He was trying to help other Dems get elected. n/t

[anamandujano]

63. Potential super delegates or already super delegates; he was investing

in his future.

Kerry kept his war chest for a future run. I believe Hillary did also as most candidates do. Obama already knew he was being primed to run.

Again, Obama knew, from the strength of his extremely wealthy entrenched contacts, that any money he threw out the window was going to come walking back in the door.

[karynnj]

59. Those here in 2006 might remember that people were mad at HRC for this

"As others have mentioned, Senator Clinton was an exception to this practise to the extent that she had raised much more than she needed for her campaign but was notably tightfisted when it came to helping her Dem colleagues"

Then someone - not necessarily connected to her campaign - in October tried to eliminate any goodwill Kerry had gained though his work for 2006 cnadidates and his raising $14 million for them by the "Hey John" nonsense. That effort praised a $2 million donation to the DSCC by Clinton and attacked Kerry for hording money from 2004. The truth beat it back convincingly - this is "Hey Barrack" the sequel to "hey John" and it should be knocked out as quickly as that was. Obama did a lot of good in 2006.

[casus belli]

11. Hillary spent 36 million in a one-sided contest re-election bid in 2006

I don't see those numbers factored in. It's sort of hard to give generously when you're spending all your PAC's funds yourself on a campaign with a laughable challenger.

If anything, what this data shows is that she is largely unwilling to contribute to others within the party even when she holds a clear advantage in her own race.

[FrenchieCat]

14. Bingo!

She was hording. Obama was giving those who gave us a majority congress.

[jackson_dem]

28. What big races were there in Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina?

Half the money went to those states. What was going on that made them so special in 2008? Oops...I mean special in 2006?

[jackson_dem]

26. Should she have done something illegal with the money?

You know, like use it for a presidential campaign by sending half the money to Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada to get around regulations? I think that is the "ethical" thing right. Maybe Obama can introduce a bill, since he says he is big on ethics, to close this loophole that he exploited?

[casus belli]

37. The entire PAC system is an exploited loophole.

The OP was implying that Obama is somehow at fault for making more contributions to other politicians. I am merely suggesting that this whole issue is a non-issue, and the reasons behind the disparity can be explained by many other things - some of which could reflect badly on Hillary if looked at with a different set of glasses.

There are enough issues to debate without bringing non-issues into the fracas. I'm not so easily drawn into the hostile straw man contests currently taking place.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

15. HILLARY DEFENDS ROLE OF SUPER DELEGATES

Obama says the Super Delegates should not change the outcome of the election

Obama Calls Out Super Delegates: "Party Insiders" Shouldn't Decide ...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/_85339.html

Its Hillary who wants the Super Delegates to be the "deciders".

Conflict of Interest? Bill Clinton Super-delegate « Stiff Right JabI understand that Bill Clinton is a super delegate. Well, I think he should excuse himself from voting because he is Hillary’s husband if it comes to the ...
http://stiffrightjab.wordpress.com/2008/02/13/conflict-of-interest-bill-clinton-super-delegate/

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive ...Clinton said she thought super delegates often had the unique position of having “first-hand knowledge of the candidates” and “if people want to go after ...
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/09/clinton-defends-role-of-super-delegates/

Hillary wants the Super Delegates to decide, even the ones who have never voted in a Presidential Election before:

ABC News: Super Schmooze: Breakfast With Chelsea21-Year-Old Wisconsin Super Delegate Gets Face Time With Former First Daughter. Chelsea. Chelsea Clinton speaks to supporters Friday, Feb. ...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4273078

But now Obama is unexpectedly gaining Super Delegates:

Action 3 News - Omaha, Nebraska News, Weather, and Sports | Obama ...And Obama's visit is already paying off. While in Omaha Obama unexpectedly picked up two key super delegates. Up for grabs this Saturday are Nebraska's 24 ...
www.action3news.com/Global/story.asp?S=7841364

Hillary may soon change her mind about Super Delegates:

Many Are Committed To Clinton, But For How Long?

...There is also a new sign of trouble for Clinton. Late Thursday, one of her Congressional supporters, Rep. David Scott of Georgia now says he intends to vote for Obama and a second is discussing a possible switch. Both are super delegates.

This comes after a handful of other super delegates said they are reconsidering their positions.

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/superdelegates.hillary.clinton.2.654503.html

At least Hillary can count on two standing firm - she and Bill both are Super Delegates.

[CalGator]

18. actually, Hillary is not a super delegate (I think)

I believe if you run for POTUS you are not a superdelegate. The system was designed to prevent that conflict of interest.

[yeswecan08]

17. Hillary is jealous - money is power in American politics

[NMMatt]

20. Good to see...

My contributions killing two birds with one stone: getting Obama elected and getting Democrats in Congress elected.

You all are really grasping for straws now!

[onehandle]

41. Obama outbribed Clinton by almost 4 to 1?

Interesting.

This is change?

[UALRBSofL]

46. onehandle, that's the bottom line

You posted the honest truth.

[Straight Shooter]

67. Please don't call it a "bribe"

Let's just refer to it as a "wink wink nudge nudge." Or let's call it "politics as usual." Or how about "quid pro quo"? Maybe "cashing in your chips"? "Betting on the bank"?

I'm sure there are all kinds of euphemisms for feathering your nest.

[mckeown1128]

44. Is this the new clinton strategy...

She can't win through pledged delgates so she starts focusing on super delegates. Can't win enough super-delegates... get some blogo nuts to start pushing the "Obama is buying super-delegates" meme.

[Orsino]

52. Yeah. 'Cause Clinton is totally against the influence of money in politics.

:eyes:

[UALRBSofL]

58. mckeown1128 the point is

Obama is a politician like any other. I don't think this is an attack or a talking point. It just proves he is part of the beltway politics. For the record, just off the top of my head, I believe McCain hasn't taken any pac money. You can fact check but I think I remember seeing it listed somewhere. I don't have the link or source.

[mckeown1128]

62. Obama hasn't taken pac money either...

I have yet have been shown what the problem is with Obama supporting Democrats in an election... it is like bizaro world in DU today.

[Renew Deal]

45. Obama outflanks Hillary again!

This proves once again that Hillary would make a terrible president.

[ProSense]

47. Obama demonstrates he gives more support to Democrats for Congress than Hillary! n/t

[my3boyz]

48. And?????????????

Hillary uses her husband to call in old favors to get super delegates for her!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[karynnj]

49. Give me a break - This refelcts that Obama's PAC helped more in 2006

Those "superdelegates" are also people who were up for re-election in 2006. Nice Rovian trick. I have not heard even one Obama surrogate specualte that he could win the nomination if he lost the delegate count.
NOT ONE.

The Clinton people are the ones who have brought up the idea that winning the majority of pledged delegates does not mean you win the nomination. They have pushed the concept that super delegates should go WINNER TAKE ALL in states that voted for her - thus the badgering of the MA Senators to "switch" votes not yet cast. (Some media people have taken it a step furter and eqaued the superdelegate vote to their endorsement.)

Kerry's answer has consistently been that it would be a disaster - either way - if politicians and insiders overturned the vote of the people. He has said people will go for the national winner of the pledged vote.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

57. Pot met Kettle

[hedgehog]

60. So, absolute worst case, Obama in 2005, anticipating a possible future

run for the Presidency, started giving money to help other Democrats get elected?

While Hillary , having sucked up big donations coast to coast, spent her money on professsional consultants?


And your problem is?

[jmg257]

61. Another example of Obama spanking "Mrs Experience" on HOW to get it done! GObama!

[rodeodance]

64. yeah--Mr. Ethic man struts his stuff.

[anamandujano]

65. A good example of the "change" he will bring to the table, same old

same old.

[RestoreGore]

66. I guess bribery is the only way some can "win" n/t

[Iceburg]

68. Oil Money put Bush in the Whitehouse, Obama's dirty money can too! -Yes we can!/nt

[AtomicKitten]

70. Your suggestion that Obama is lobbying SDs harder than the Clintons is absurd and

... contradicted by all the evidence.

[Forkboy]

71. Yeah, being second in this category makes things so much sweeter.

Some of you people are just plain gone. :crazy:

[anamandujano]

73. His "change" mantra needs to be changed to reflect reality.

He does love pulling the wool over though and has the gullible right where he wants them.

[ericgtr]

75. I just saw something about this on CNN

and the analyst they spoke to said that the candidates are smart and didn't want to take any credit away from them but they would have to be geniuses to predict they would be buying them off 2 years down the road.